Hi Kai, Thomas,
This is great, thanks a lot!
Cheers,
Antoine
On 8/19/15 10:52 AM, Kai Eckert wrote:
> I assume you do, it is free for all :-)
>
> Nevertheless, done. I added you as maintainer for
> http://purl.org/net/rdf-application-profiles
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kai
>
> Am 13.08.2015 um 15:49 schrieb Bosch, Thomas:
>> Hi Kai,
>>
>> can you please create a new PURL for our database?
>> I assume I do not have the rights doing this using the PURL service...
>>
>> Then, we have 2 PURLs pointing to the same database:
>>
>> http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation
>> http://purl.org/net/rdf-application-profiles
>>
>> We still need http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation as we already published this PURL in diverse scientific papers.
>>
>> Thank you very much Kai!
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Thomas
>>
>>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> On the call Karen, Corey, Stefanie and I thought it would be a good idea to create a new PURL as you suggest.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Antoine
>>
>> On 7/30/15 3:12 PM, Bosch, Thomas wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I changed the name of the database to 'RDF Application Profiles' as suggested by Antoine.
>>>
>>> What about the PURL of the database?
>>> http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation
>>>
>>> Should it be changed to maybe
>>> http://purl.org/net/rdf-application-profiles
>>>
>>> Suggestions?
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Trying to chime in before the call (sorry I'm in an out these weeks).
>>>
>>> The export point is an important one, and it's great to see this is almost solve :-)
>>>
>>> And there was indeed the one of naming and URLs, which give too much emphasis on validation now.
>>> It would be ideal if it was named "RDF Application Profiles" or something like this. It probably needs to have "RDF" and "Application Profiles" somewhere!
>>>
>>> The point is that we were not sure how much trouble it would be for you, and prefered to check. Now that I see you've changed it just 'to show that this is possible', I feel very optimistic that we can find a perfect solution :-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Antoine
>>>
>>> On 7/24/15 1:39 AM, Kai Eckert wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> the actual location of the database at
>>>> lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de is not very sustainable, only the
>>>> purl.org URI should be used to reference the database. Of course it can
>>>> be changed, or rather an additional URI can be coined, because the one
>>>> right now is already used in some papers.
>>>>
>>>> The URIs of the database entries are also not ideal, I would suggest to
>>>> not use them as URIs but always refer to the database via the purl.org
>>>> URI and to the entries via the numbering scheme (UC-14 or
>>>> UC-14-RECOMMENDED-LANGUAGE-TAGS).
>>>>
>>>> For long term preservation after work on the database has ended, I would
>>>> suggest to use some export format (we installed a plugin to support
>>>> some) or a static HTML dump. I am sure that such static data can be
>>>> hosted by DCMI.
>>>>
>>>> The maintenance of the database as work environment is primarily done by
>>>> Thomas with support by me. As long as Thomas maintains it, I support it.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the server, we do not have a professional, sustainable hosting
>>>> solution. Right now, it runs on a research VM that I will have at least
>>>> until 2017. I am willing to migrate the database to a server in
>>>> Stuttgart, if required, though.
>>>>
>>>> With the current setting and daily backups managed by Thomas, I think,
>>>> we are considerably fine. It's not 24/7 99.9999% guaranteed uptime, but
>>>> we should not loose the database and in case of a server failure, we
>>>> should be able to set it up again.
>>>>
>>>> If Thomas leaves, though, we have to reconsider, as you rightly point out.
>>>>
>>>> To conclude, I would put it this way:
>>>>
>>>> If we see the database as a work tool to be used right now for the task
>>>> group, probably being done within at most 2 years (W3C WG charted until
>>>> 2016-02) and then being sustained in a static way for reference, then we
>>>> can consider it to be sustainable.
>>>>
>>>> If we see it as something that has to exist in its current, editable
>>>> form forever, then we are not really sustainable and some committment of
>>>> an infrastructure provider (which I am not) for the hosting and
>>>> maintenance would be needed.
>>>>
>>>> Hope that helps.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Kai
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 20.07.2015 um 22:30 schrieb Karen Coyle:
>>>>> Thomas,thanks for making the changes, and I hope your dissertation is
>>>>> going well!
>>>>>
>>>>> The group discussed whether we would continue using the database, and
>>>>> generally we were positive on this. However, we worried some about
>>>>> long-term archiving of the database, since it becomes the background
>>>>> support data for the documentation we would write (which have links to
>>>>> the details in the database). So if the database should go away (which
>>>>> it could for various reasons -- I doubt if you see yourself maintaining
>>>>> it into your old age and retirement ;-)), we'd like for there to be a
>>>>> backup of some kind for the data supporting the DC documents. (Perhaps
>>>>> pushed to some archival "cloud".) That was the discussion, and it comes
>>>>> from having some dedicated digital archivists in the group, who would
>>>>> not forgive us for linking to an un-archived source.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's hard to get all of that into the notes, I admit.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I recall, Eric Prud'hommeaux either scraped or exported some of the
>>>>> data for some work he was doing. I'm fairly confident that an export is
>>>>> possible, I'm just not sure how elegant it will be. In any case, this is
>>>>> something the group is thinking about, but as yet there isn't a firm
>>>>> solution or decision.
>>>>>
>>>>> kc
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/20/15 12:45 PM, Bosch, Thomas wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sorry, the last call I could nit make it as I had a serious paper
>>>>>> deadline for my PhD thesis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One question raised the last call was to change the URL of the database.
>>>>>> When I set up the database with Kai, we created a PURL:
>>>>>> http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation
>>>>>> I could change this URL if wished.
>>>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another question was, if I understood correctly, if the title for the
>>>>>> database 'rdf-validation' could be changed.
>>>>>> Yes, I changed it to 'DCMI Application Profiles' to show that this is
>>>>>> possible.
>>>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So far, I do not have any experience in providing an export
>>>>>> functionality.
>>>>>> If this is wished I could do some research on that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will continue using the database as I use it for my research on RDF
>>>>>> validation.
>>>>>> You suggest not to continue using it? If yes, this would be a pity...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the call today, we had a long discussion about how we should manage
>>>>>> our information on use cases and requirements, which is currently in
>>>>>> the databse you've set up:
>>>>>> http://lelystad.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/rdf-validation/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We would like very much to hear your opinion on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've copied the minutes of our discussion on it below.
>>>>>> The minutes of the full call are at
>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/dcmi-ap-16-07-2015
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I don't need to explain a lot more the questions we had, but
>>>>>> feel free to ask if a point is not clear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Antoine
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karen: in terms of documentation: many things are in the database.
>>>>>> Should we continue?
>>>>>> Antoine: I'd like to base our reqs on cases
>>>>>> Karen: we could copy them outside
>>>>>> Corey: the DB has 'RDF validation' in the URI.
>>>>>> Evelyn: I could copy in the UC document
>>>>>> Karen: the requirement wiki also points to the DB.
>>>>>> antoine: if we copy the DB in one document, it could be huge
>>>>>> Karen: it has all our ideas
>>>>>> Evelyn: we could export it
>>>>>> Karen: we could do at the end of the task force
>>>>>> Antoine: in the meantime, where should we do our updates (use cases or
>>>>>> requirements)?
>>>>>> Corey: if we draw new people to our group the 'RDF validation' title
>>>>>> may be confusing.
>>>>>> Antoine: it has played a trick on us once already :-)
>>>>>> Antoine: we could ask Thomas to change the URL?
>>>>>> Corey: probably a non-starter. He uses it for his PhD, which is on
>>>>>> validation
>>>>>> Corey: the LLD XG report had links to separate wiki pages with the
>>>>>> original use case details
>>>>>> ... which corresponds to an HTML version of what we could do.
>>>>>> ... we could do an Markdown export
>>>>>> Antoine: thomas was using the DB to keep track of updates
>>>>>> ... he could prefer us to keep using it rather than do updates on a
>>>>>> separate wiki page
>>>>>> Karen: how many times would people need to access the origianl
>>>>>> description?
>>>>>> ... maybe not so much, so we could have the info exported in a more
>>>>>> basic way
>>>>>> [discussion on creating one page on the wiki for every UC]
>>>>>> Corey: a page could be ok, as long as it has all the info
>>>>>> Corey: Here's something interesting: Drupal-Jekyll-Markdown module:
>>>>>> https://github.com/lukaswhite/Drupal-Jekyll-Export
>>>>>> This would potentially allow us to export a markdown page per drupal
>>>>>> node, and then generate media-wiki pages from those.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
|